March 26, 2015

Exemption No. 11238 Regulatory Docket No. FAA

- 2014

- 0719

Mr. Dallas Cormier San Diego Gas & Electric Company

101 Ash Street San Diego, CA 92101

Dear Mr. Cormier :

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your request for exemption. It transmits our decision, explains its basis, and gives you the conditions and limitations of the exemption, including the date it ends.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter dated September 12, 2014

, 1 you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of San Diego Gas & Electric Company ( hereinafter petitioner or operator ) for an exemption

. The exemption would all ow the petitioner to operate an unmanned ai rcraft system (UAS) to conduct aerial inspections of its electric and gas facilities including

emergency respo nse damage assessments

.

See Appendix A for the petition submitted to the FAA des cribing the proposed operations and

the regulations that the petitioner seeks an exemption

.

1 By letter dated October 20, 2014, and posted in the public docket on October 22, 2014, the petitioner filed a supplement to its petition.2

Discussion of Public Comments:

A summary of the petition was published in the Federal Register on September 30, 2014, (79 FR 58850). Four comments were received. The Small UAV Coalition (Coalition) supported the petition, and the Air Line Pilots Association, International ( ALPA) and the National Agricultural Aviation Association (NAAA) and an individual opposed it.

I n supp o r t of the p e tition, the C o a lition st a t e d the p e tition e r h a s p r opos e d to a bide b y st r o n g e r

s a fe t y m e a su re s th a n hob b y a nd mod e l e r g r oups op e r a ting simil a r a i r c raf t. The C o a lition

st a t e d th a t it do e s not b e li e ve th a t h e i g ht e n e d s a f e t y m ea su r e s should be re qui re d f or the

p e tition e r simp l y b eca use o f the c omm e rc i a l n a tu r e of its op e ra tions. The C o a lition u r g e d the

F AA to a dopt a n e v a l u a tion fra m e w o r k f or U AS op era tions und e r s e c t ion 333 of P ublic

Law 112

– 95 th a t w e i g hs the r e l a tive s a f e t y issu e s a nd r isks of UAS b y c l a ss a nd op era tion al

c i rc umst a n c e s, ra th e r th a n a dopting a r ti f i c i a l distin c tions a mong unm a n n e d aer i a l v e h i c l e s b a s e d on c omm erc i a l a nd no n c omm erc i a l op e r a tions. The p e tition er’ s UAS pose

c onsid e ra b l y l e ss s afe t y r isk th a n l ar g e r U AS. The C o a lition a ss er t e d th a t b e ca use UAS

op era tions like the p e tition er’ s pose minim a l r isk to s afe t y , th e y should be subj ec t to minim a l

a nd a pp r op r i a te r e g ul a tions.

The C o a lition not e d the F AA is to c onsid e r t h e s e v e n fac t o r s 2 in s ec tion 333 a s a minimum.

The C o a lition st a t e d the p e tit i on shows the F AA shou l d c onsid e r f a c to r s oth e r t h a n those

sp ec i f i e d in s ec tion 333, su c h a s such as: location (restricted airspace), the altitude of its small UAV operations, pilot experience, and the airworthiness approvals of the FAA and Department of Army. The C o a lition m a int a in e d th a t the p e tition er’ s p r opos e d op era tions

s a tis f y the s e v e n fac t o r s in s ec tion 333 a nd in c lude s e v e ra l a ddition a l miti g a ting f a c t o r s to

e nsu r e the s afe t y a n d s ec u r i t y of the p r opos e d UAS op e r a tions. The C o a lition e mph a si z e d the

F AA must e v a l u a te e a c h f a c tor within the c ont e x t of the p e tition er’ s p r opo s e d UAS

op e r a tions.

The C o a lition a lso c omm e nt e d th a t the F AA should g r a nt re li e f fr om the r e qui re m e nt to hold

a n a i r m a n c er ti f i ca t e. The Coalition further stated that if an airman certificate is required then,

a t a minimum the, F AA should p r ovi d e a n e x ce ption fr om the t ra ini n g a nd t e sting

r e quirements in part 61 in favor of requirements p er tin e nt to the a i r c raf t a nd op era tion

p r opos e d. The C o a lition a lso a ss er t e d th a t in s ec tion 333 Congress intended for the FAA to

consider n a tion a l s ec u r i t y with respect to the operation as opposed to addressing it through pilot certification.

2 Section 333(b) of P.L. 112

- 95 states, in part: “In making the determination under subsection (a), the Secreta ry shall determine, at a minimum

-- (1) which types of unmanned aircraft systems, if any, as a result of their size, weight, speed, operational capability, proximity to airports and populated areas, and operation within visual line of sight do not create a hazard to users of the national airspace system or the public or pose a threat to national security; ...”3

The FAA notes that

, a s dis c uss e d in the g r a nt of e x e mption to T r imble N a vig a tion L td. (Exemption No. 1111 0 ) , n e ith e r s ec tion 333, nor th e F A A ’ s exemption authority 3 allows

the F AA to e x e mpt pilots from the st a tuto r y r e qui r e m e nt to hold a n a i r m a n c e r ti f i ca te a s

p re s cr ib e d in 49 U S C § 44711.

The C o a lition c omm e nt e d th a t a visu a l obs er v e r ( VO) should not be re qui r e d f or a ll sm a ll UAS op era tions. The C o a lition f u r th e r a s s er t e d th a t the p re s e n c e of one o r mo r e VOs m a y

a llow the UAS to be op era t e d b e y o nd visual line of sight ( V L OS) of the pilot in command ( P I C) a nd th a t the p e tition er’ s p r o p os a l to op era te the UA within V L OS of the P I C and/or VO

should b e p er mitt e d.

The F AA n ot e s th a t one of the d e t er min a tions f or op e ra t ions und e r s ec tion 333 is op era tion

within visu a l line of si g ht. The P I C must m a int a in V L OS w hile op era ti n g the UA. The F AA

finds that a VO c o mpl e m e nts the P I C s ca p a bili t y to s e e a nd a void oth e r a i r cr a f t, in c luding

wh e n t h e P I C m a y b e mom e nt ar i l y a tt e ndi n g to oth e r f l y

i n g t a sks. The VO p r ovid e s a n

a ddition a l l e v e l of op e ra tion a l s a f e t y

.

A L P A e x p re ss e d c on c er n r e g ar di n g s e v e r a l a sp ec t s of the p e tition. A L P A stated that it does not support any small UAS operation proposing flight operations in Class C and D airspace, ALPA argued that operations in Class C and D airspace are “potentially in extremely close proximity to routine manned aircraft operations.”

The F AA b e li e v e s the limit a tions und e r whi c h the p e tition e r will op era te ( i. e
., V L OS a nd a t

or b e low 4 00 fee t A G L in Class G airspace ) and the notification requirements specified in the Air Traffic Organization (ATO) issued Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA),

su ff i c i e nt ly miti g a t e this r isk so th a t the op era tions will not a dv er s e l y a f fec t s afe t y

.

ALPA noted that the petition does not clearly state how the pilot and the obs er v e r will be

a ble t o c ommuni ca te with each other b y voi c e or text. ALPA stated that text messaging could

have unknown latenc ies and extend to several minutes. A L P A further stated that voice communication with the pilot is a limited mitigation if both the pilot and observer are not

able to maintain a visual observation of both the aircraft and the area. The conditions and limitations regarding PIC and VO communicati ons address those concerns.

A L P A a ss er ted the UA S ’ s lithium po l y m e r b a tt er i e s h a ve num er ous a sso c i a t e d f i r e a nd

e x plosion h a z ar ds a s outlin e d in DOT/ F AA/A R

− 09/55, “ F l a mm a bili t y As s e ssm e nt of

L

ithium

- I on a nd L ithium

- I on P o l y m e r B a t t e r y C e ll D e si g n e d f or Ai rcr a f t P ow e r U s a g e ( J a n u a r y 2010 ) ,” a nd th a t the s af e ca r r i a g e of t h e b a tt er i e s a nd the mitig a tions in pl ac e f or kn o wn r i s ks should be a dd re ss e d. The FAA states t h e r e fe r e n ce d stu d y w a s p r im ar i l y

c o ndu c t e d to d e t er mine h o w cer t a in b a tt e r y c e lls reac t in a f i r e situ a tion a b o ar d m a nn e d

a i rpl a n e s. Giv e n the si z e of the b a t t e r y a nd the o p era ti n g c onditions of the UA S , the F AA

3 49 USC § 44701(f)4

c on c lud e s t h a t the use of a lithium po l y m e r b a tt e r y will not pose a n undue s a f e t y r isk f or t he

p r opos e d op e ra tions.

A L P A c omm e nted th a t c o mm a nd a nd c ont r ol ( C 2) link fa ilu re s a r e one of th e most c ommon fa ilu re s on a UA S

, a nd t h a t lost link mi t i g a tions should re qui r e s a f e mod e s t o p re v e nt
f l y

- a w a ys or oth e r s ce n ar ios. The FAA has inserted conditions and limitations in this exemption to mitigate the risk associated with such failures.

A L P A a lso not e d th a t the p e tition er’ s p r opos e d o p era tions a r e f or “c omp e n s a tion or hi re ,”

a nd therefore contends the pilot must hold a t l ea st a c u rre nt F AA c omm erc i a l pilot cer ti f i c a te
with a n a pp r o p r i a te ca t e g o r y a nd c l a ss r a ting f or the t y pe of a i rc r af t b e ing f lown, a s w e ll a s

sp e c i f ic a nd a d e qu a te t ra ining on the U AS m a ke a nd mod e l int e nd e d to be us e d. S imil ar l y
, A L P A a ss er ts a c u r r e nt s ec ond

- c l a ss a i r m a n m e d i ca l cer ti f i c a te should be re qui re d. N AAA

a lso c o mm e nt e d on pilot qu a li f i ca tion, st a tin g

—

J ust a s m a nn e d a i rcraf t p i lots ar e re qui r e d to und e r g o a r i g o r ous t ra ini n g c u rr i c ulum

a nd show th a t th e y ar e f it to op era te a c omm erc i a l a i r c raf t, so too must UAS

op era to r s. Holding a c omm erc i a l c er ti f i ca te holds UAS op era to r s to simil a r hi g h

st a nd ar ds a s c omm e rc i a l a i rc r af t op e r a to r s a nd e nsu re s th e y a r e a w a r e of th e ir

re sponsibiliti e s a s c omm erc i a l op e r a to r s within the NA S . M e di c a l re qui re m e nts

e nsu r e th e y h a v e the n e ce ss a r y visu a l a nd m e nt a l ac ui t y to op era te a c omm erc i a l

a i rc r af t re p ea t e d l y ov e r a sust a in e d p er iod of tim e

.

Additionally, in opposition of the petition, an individual commented that the PIC should ho ld

a rotorcraft

- helicopter FAA issued license as well as a fixed wing airplane license rating. The commenter stated that a person operating a UAS must have a solid understanding of rotorcraft aerodynamics including issues like settling with power, gyrosc opic precession, hovering ground affect, forward flight advancing and retreating blade issues.

The FAA has reviewed the knowledge and training requirements of sport, recreational, private and commercial certificates and concluded that a UAS PIC holding a minimum of a sport pilot certificate, and operating under this exemption, would not adversely affect operations in the NAS or present a hazard to persons or property on the ground.

A L P A not ed the p e tition e r must sp ec i f y a m ea ns to m ee t s e e a nd a void re qu i re m e nts in § 91.113 g i v e n the a bs e n c e of a n onbo ar d pilot. The FAA notes that all flights must be operated within VLOS of the PIC and VO.

A L P A commented the a i r craf t will not h a ve a b ar o m e t r ic a ltim e t e r a s r e qui r e d b y § 91.121.

ALPA stated that processes or mit i gations must be in place to ensure the UA can accurately maintain altitude including engineering processes, software development and control, electronic hardware development and control, configuration management, and design

assurance to en sure the aircraft and its control system(s) operate to the same level of safety as other aircraft operated commercially in the National Airspace System (NAS).5

ALPA also expressed concern that the petition makes no reference to compliance with, or a

request for waiver from, 14 CFR 61.195, Flight instructor limitations and qualifications

, which defines the requirements for flight instructors. A certificated flight instructor is authorized to provide the instruction required for the certificates or ratings or currency listed in 14 CFR § 61.193. A person instructing on how to operate the UAS under the petitioner’s training program would not need to be a certificated flight instructor because the instruction is not being provided for a certificate or rating list ed in § 61.193. We note that none of the UAS operations proposed by the petitioner require such flight instruction because § 61.31( l ) allows for operation of the UAS by an airman who is current per 14 CFR § 61.56 without a category and class rating. Instr uction provided toward obtaining the pilot certificate required by this exemption would need to be provided by a certificated flight instructor.

R e g a r di n g the f u e l re qui r e m e nts of § 91.151, A L P A a r g u e d th a t usi n g b a tt e r i e s a s the on l y

sou r c e of a n a i r cr a f t ’ s pow e r is a subst a nti a l shi f t fr om t ra dition a l m e thods of p r opulsion, a nd

re qui re s f u r th e r r e s e a rc h to d e t e r mine b e st s afe t y p r ac ti c e s. The F AA h a s ins e r t e d a c ondition

and limitation to address th is issue

.

R e g a r di n g §§ 91.405 ( a )

, 91.407 (a)( 1 ) , 91.409 ( a )( 2 )

, a nd 91.417 ( a ) a nd ( b )

, A L P A oppos e d

t h e p e tition er’ s a tt e mpt to a v oid c ompli a n c e with e st a blish e d a i rcr a f t m a int e n a n c e a nd

r ec o r dk ee pi n g re qui re m e nts. A L P A st a t e d the UAS should c omply with the s a me l e v e l of

s afe t y a s oth e r a i rc r af t op e r a t e d c omm e r c i a l l y in the N A S

. The F AA h a s ins e r t e d c ondition

r e g a r ding this issue

.

A L P A a lso e x p re ss e d c o n cer n th a t the p e tition er ’ s r e qu e st is not f o r a sin g l e sp ec i f i c

op era tion or lo c a tion, but f or a ll op e r a tions of the s a me g e n e ra l t y p e

. A L P A st a t e d this

re sults in a c onsid e r a ble in c r ea se i n the F A A ’ s ov er s i g ht t a sks. The F AA no t e s A L P As

c on cer n a nd in o r d e r to minimi z e pot e nt i a l imp ac t to the NA S , the F AA r e qui re s that eac h

o p e r a tor s ec u r e a C er ti f i ca te of Waiver or Autho r i z a tion ( C OA ) whi c h c o v er s sp ec i f ic

d e t a ils of the p e tition er s op era tion. The F A A r e c o g ni z e s th a t UAS int e g r a tion will g e n era te

n e w NAS a cce ss d e m a nd a nd will re vi e w a nd a djust a c c o r d in g l y

.

NAAA noted that its members operate in low

- level airspace, and therefore clear low

- level airspace is vital to the safety of these operators. NAAA stated that seeing and avoiding other aircraft and hazardous obstructions is the backbone for agricultural safety, and that agricultural pilots depend on pilots of other aircraft to perform their see

- and

- avoid functions to prevent collisions. NAAA believes UAS operations at low altitudes will increase the potential for collision with agricultural aircraft.6

The FAA recognizes these concerns and has incorporated associated conditions and

limitations into this e xemption, including: (a) a Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) issued for all operations; (b) operations conducted within VLOS of the pilot in command (PIC) and the VO; and (c) the UAS PIC must always yield right

- of

- way to manned aircraft.

NAAA stated that FAA airwo rthiness certification should be a requirement for all unmanned aircraft to operate within the NAS. NAAA recommended UAS be equipped with ADS

- B or similar identification and positioning systems, strobe lights, high

- visibility markings and registration numb ers. NAAA also recommended UAS be operated strictly within the line

- of

sight of the ground controller, with the assistance of a VO and clear of any low

- flying manned

aircraft.

Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to determine, considering a number of factors laid out in the statute, that an airworthiness certificate is not necessary for certain operations. The Secretary has made that

determination in this case and therefore the aircraft operated by the petitioner will not need to be certificated by the FAA.

Airworthiness Certification

The UAS proposed by the petitioner is the InstantEye Mk

- 2 Gen2

.

The petitioner requested relief from 14 CFR part 21, C ertification procedures for products and parts, Subpart H

— Airworthiness Certificates . In accordance with the statutory criteria provided in Section 333 of P ublic Law 112

− 95 in reference to 49 U

. S

. C

. § 44704, and in consideration of the size, weight, speed, and limited operating area associated with the

aircraft and its operation, the Secretary of Transportation has determined that this aircraft meets the conditions of Section 333. Therefore, the FAA finds that the requested relief from

14 CFR part 21, and any associated noise certific ation and testing requirements of part 36, is

not necessary.

The Basis for Our Decision

You have requested to use a UAS for aerial data collection . The FAA has issued grants of exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to those presente d in your petition. In Grants of Exemption No. 11062 to Astraeus Aerial ( see Docket No. FAA−2014−0352), 11109 to Clayco, Inc. ( see Docket No. FAA

− 2014

− 0507), 11112 to VDOS Global, LLC ( see Docket No. FAA−2014−0382), and 11213 to Aeryon Lab, Inc. ( see Docket No. FAA−2014−0642), the FAA found that the enhanced safety achieved using an unmanned aircraft (UA) with the specifications described by the petitioner and carrying no passengers or crew, rather than a manned aircraft of significantly greater propo rtions, carrying crew in addition to flammable fuel, gives the FAA good cause to find that the UAS operation enabled by this exemption is in the public interest.7

Having reviewed your reasons for requesting an exemption, I find that

—

• They are similar in all material respects to relief previously requested in Grant of Exemption Nos. 11062, 11109, 11112, and 11213 ;

• The reasons stated by the FAA for granting Exemption Nos. 11062, 11109, 11112, and

11213 also apply to the situation you pre sent; and

• A grant of exemption is in the public interest.

Our Decision

In consideration of the foregoing, I find that a grant of exemption is in the public interest. Therefore, pursuant to the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 40113, and 44701, delegated to me by the Administrator, San Diego Gas & Electric Company is granted an exemption from 14 CFR §§ 61.23(a) and ( c ), 61.101(e)(4 ) and (5), 61.113(a), 61.315(a)

, 91.7(a), 91.119(c), 91.121, 91.151(a)(1), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) and (2), and 91.417(a) and (b), to the extent necessary to allow the petitioner to operate a UAS to perform

aerial data collection. This exemption is subject to the conditions and limitations listed below.

Conditions and Limitations

In this grant of exempti on, San Diego Gas & Electric Company is hereafter referred to as

the operator.

Failure to comply with any of the conditions and limitations of this grant of exemption will be grounds for the immediate suspension or rescission of this exemption.

1. Operations authorized by this grant of exemption are limited to the InstantEye Mk

- 2

Gen2 when weighing less than 55 pounds including payload. Proposed operations of any other aircraft will require a new petition or a petition to amend this exemption

.

2. Oper ations for the purpose of closed

- set motion picture and television filming are not permitted.

3. The UA may not be operated at a speed exceeding 87 knots (100 miles per hour). The exemption holder may use either groundspeed or calibrated airspeed to determine compliance with the 87 knot speed restriction. In no case will the UA be operated at airspeeds greater than the maximum UA operating airspeed recommended by the

aircraft manufacturer.

4. The UA must be operated at an altitude of no more than 400 f eet above ground level (AGL). Altitude must be reported in feet AGL.8

5. The UA must be operated within visual line of sight (VLOS) of the PIC at all times. This requires the PIC to be able to use human vision unaided by any device other than

corrective lense s, as specified on the PIC’s FAA

- issued airman medical certificate or

U.S. driver’s license.

6. All operations must utilize a visual observer (VO). The UA must be operated within the visual line of sight (VLOS) of the PIC and VO at all times. The VO may be used to satisfy the VLOS requirement as long as the PIC always maintains VLOS capability. The VO and PIC must be able to communicate verbally at all times ;

e lectronic messaging or texting is not permitted during flight operations. The PIC must

be designated before the flight and cannot transfer his or her designation for the duration of the flight. The PIC must ensure that the VO can perform the duties required of the VO.

7. This exemption and all documents needed to operate the UAS and conduct its operations in accordance with the conditions and limitations stated in this grant of exemption, are hereinafter referred to as the operating documents. The operating

documents must be accessible during UAS operations and made available to the

Administrato r upon request. If a discrepancy exists between the conditions and limitations in this exemption and the procedures outlined in the operating documents, the conditions and limitations herein take precedence and must be followed. Otherwise, the operator mu st follow the procedures as outlined in its operating documents. The operator may update or revise its operating documents. It is the operator’s responsibility to track such revisions and present updated and revised documents to the Administrator or any law enforcement official upon request. The operator must also present updated and revised documents if it petitions for extension or amendment to this grant of exemption. If the operator determines that any update or revision would affect the basis upon w hich the FAA granted this exemption, then the operator must petition for an amendment to its grant of exemption. The FAA’s UAS Integration Office (AFS

- 80) may be contacted if questions arise regarding updates or revisions to the operating documents.

8. Any UAS that has undergone maintenance or alterations that affect the UAS operation or flight characteristics, e.g. replacement of a flight critical component, must undergo a functional test flight prior to conducting further operations under this exemption. Functional test flights may only be conducted by a PIC with a VO and must remain at least 500 feet from other people. The functional test flight must be conducted in such a manner so as to not pose an undue hazard to persons and property.

9. The operator is responsible for maintaining and inspecting the UAS to ensure that it is in a condition for safe operation.

10. Prior to each flight, the PIC must conduct a pre

- flight inspection and determine the UAS is in a condition for safe flight. The pre

- flight inspect ion must account for all9

potential discrepancies, e.g. inoperable components, items, or equipment. If the inspection reveals a condition that affects the safe operation of the UAS, the aircraft is prohibited from operating until the necessary maintenance h as been performed and the UAS is found to be in a condition for safe flight.

11. The operator must follow the UAS manufacturer’s maintenance, overhaul, replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements for the aircraft and aircraft

components.

12. Each UAS op erated under this exemption must comply with all manufacturer safety

bulletins.

13. Under this grant of exemption, a PIC must hold either an airline transport, commercial, private, recreational, or sport pilot certificate. The PIC must also hold a

current FAA airman medical certificate or a valid U.S. driver’s license issued by a state, the District of Colombia, Puerto Rico, a territory, a possession, or the Federal government. The PIC must also meet the flight revi ew requirements specified in

14 CFR § 61 .56 in an aircraft in which the PIC is rated on his or her pilot certificate.

14. The operator may not permit any PIC to operate unless the PIC demonstrates the ability to safely operate the UAS in a manner consistent with how the UAS will be operated under t his exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate distances from persons, vessels, vehicles and structures. PIC qualification flight hours and currency must be logged in a manner consistent with

14 CFR § 61.51(b). Fligh ts for the purposes of training the operator’s PICs and VOs (training, proficiency, and experience

- building) and determining the PIC’s ability to safely operate the UAS in a manner consistent with how the UAS will be operated under this exemption are permi tted under the terms of this exemption. However, training operations may only be conducted during dedicated training sessions. During training, proficiency, and experience

- building flights, all persons not essential for flight operations are considered n onparticipants, and the PIC must operate the UA with appropriate distance from nonparticipants in accordance with 14 CFR § 91.119.

15. UAS operations may not be conducted during night, as defined in 14 CFR § 1.1. All operations must be conducted under visual meteorological conditions (VMC). Flights under special visual flight rules (SVFR) are not authorized.

16. The UA may not operate within 5 nautical miles of an airport reference point (ARP) as denoted in the current FAA Airport/Facility Directory (AFD) or for airports not denoted with an ARP, the center of the airport symbol as denoted on the current FAA

published aeronautical chart, unless a letter of agreement with that airport’s management is obtained or otherwise permitted by a COA issued to the exemption

h older. The letter of agreement with the airport management must be made available to the Administrator or any law enforcement official upon request.10

17. The UA may not be operated less than 500 feet below or less than 2,000 feet horizontally from a cloud or w hen visibility is less than 3 statute miles from the PIC.

18. If the UAS loses communications or loses its GPS signal, the UA must return to a pre

determined location within the private or controlled

- access property.

19. The PIC must abort the flight in the even t of unpredicted obstacles or emergencies.

20. The PIC is prohibited from beginning a flight unless (considering wind and forecast weather conditions) there is enough available power for the UA to conduct the intended operation and to operate after that for a t least five minutes or with the reserve power recommended by the manufacturer if greater.

21. Air Traffic Organization (ATO) Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA). All operations shall be conducted in accordance with an ATO

- issued COA. The exemption holder may apply for a new or amended COA if it intends to conduct operations that cannot be conducted under the terms of the attached COA

.

22. All aircraft operated in accordance with this exemption must be identified by serial number, registered in accorda nce with 14 CFR part 47, and have identification (N

Number) markings in accordance with 14 CFR part 45, Subpart C. Markings must be as large as practicable.

23. Documents used by the operator to ensure the safe operation and flight of the UAS and any documents required under 14 CFR §§ 91.9 and 91.203 must be available to the PIC at the Ground Control Station of the UAS any time the aircraft is operating. These

doc uments must be made available to the Administrator or any law enforcement official upon request.

24. The UA must remain clear and give way to all manned aviation operations and

activities at all times.

25. The UAS may not be operated by the PIC from any moving device or vehicle.

26. All Flight operations must be conducted at least 500 feet from all nonparticipating persons, vessels, vehicles, and structures unless:

a. Barriers or structures are present that sufficiently protect nonparticipating persons

from the UA an d/or debris in the event of an accident. The operator must ensure that nonparticipating persons remain under such protection. If a situation arises where nonparticipating persons leave such protection and are within 500 feet of the UA, flight operations mu st cease immediately in a manner ensuring the safety of nonparticipating persons ; and11

b. The owner/controller of any vessels, vehicles or structures has granted permission for operating closer to those objects and the PIC has made a safety assessment of

the r isk of operating closer to those objects and determined that it does not present an undue hazard.

The PIC, VO, operator trainees or essential persons are not considered nonparticipating persons under this exemption.

27. All operations shall be conducted over private or controlled

- access property with permission from the property owner/controller or authorized representative. Permission from property owner/controller or authorized representative will be obtained for each flight to be conducted.

28. Any incident, accident, or flight operation that transgresses the lateral or vertical boundaries of the operational area as defined by the applicable COA must be reported to the FAA's UAS Integration Office (AFS

- 80) within 24 hours. Accidents must be reported to the Nat ional Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) per instructions

contained on the NTSB Web site: www.ntsb.gov

.

If this exemption permits closed

- set motion picture and television filming and production, the following additional conditions and limitations apply.

29. The operator must have a motion picture and television operations manual (MPTOM) as documented in this grant of exemption.

30. At least 3 days before aerial filming, the operator of the UAS affected by this exemption must submit a written Plan of Activities to the local Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) with jurisdiction over the area of proposed filming. The 3

- day notification may be waived with the concurrence of the FSDO. The plan of activities

must include at lea st the following:

a. Dates and times for all flights;

b. Name and phone number of the operator for the UAS aerial filming conducted under this grant of exemption;

c. Name and phone number of the person responsible for the on

- scene operation of the UAS;

d. Make, model, and serial or N

- Number of UAS to be used;

e. Name and certificate number of UAS PICs involved in the aerial filming;

f. A statement that the operator has obtained permission from property owners and/or local officials to conduct the filming production event; th e list of those who gave permission must be made available to the inspector upon request;

g. Signature of exemption holder or representative; and

h. A description of the flight activity, including maps or diagrams of any area, city, town, county, and/or state ov er which filming will be conducted and the altitudes essential to accomplish the operation.12

31. Flight operations may be conducted closer than 500 feet from participating persons consenting to be involved and necessary for the filming production, as specified in the exemption holder’s MPTOM.

Unless otherwise specified in this grant of exemption, the UAS, the UAS PIC, and the UAS operations must comply with all applicable parts of 14 CFR including, but not limited to, parts 45, 47, 61, and 91.

This exemption terminates on March 31, 2017 , unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/ John Barbagallo Acting Deputy Director, Flight Standards Service